Hypothetical question regarding Robb's Will

[Sir Tan Lee]

Manderly knows Rickon's alive, that will is going to be rebuked because it was under false pretences.

Actually if he's Lyanna's son (I would love to see characters believing that) he comes after Arya in the line of inheritance.

I'll use the English system to show it:

Older brother

His sons

His daughters

Younger brother

His sons

His daughters

Older sister (doesn't matter if she's older than her brothers)

Her sons

Her daughters

Manderly doesn't know anything. He heard a story from a kid. It could be that Davos never returns and they just assume the story was fake and Rickons actually dead. Why do you think he sent Davos any ways? If he was a hundred percent sure its more likely he would have sent a small force of men to retrieve him instead he sent Davos a man of questionable loyalty.

Your right on the Arrya and Sansa part but they are both missing or assumed dead so that would only leave Jon Snow.

[Valandui]

The exact wording of the will may not be relevant. If Robb made Jon the heir and legitimized him, it stands. As always, power is about perception. If (and it's still definitely an if) the northern lords are conspiring to restore the Starks, Jon is by far the best option. Arya is still presumed dead. Bran is missing and crippled. Rickon is very young. Sansa is a Lannister. If the north wants a Stark as either liege lord or KitN they will say he's legitimate now. He's the only one that can lead now.

The reasons Jon turned down Winterfell before are his vows and not wanting to steal Sansa's claim. Things were different at the time. Jon didn't know Robb had made him heir. If he knew that Robb wanted him to become the next KitN he might feel differently. Stannis is an outsider and he wanted the weirwood trees burned.

The assassination attempt is another game changer. The phrase "kill the boy and let the man be born" is repeated often. This indicates Jon will be a changed man when he wakes up. The story master Aemon told about being offered the crown even though he was already sworn to the NW means there is precedent. If Jon sees becoming Robb's heir as the best thing for realm, he will take the will and run with it.

Also, who knows what will happen when Jon is unconscious. I think it's very likely Bran will communicate with him in a way that nudges Jon in the direction of accepting his role as a king.

Even then, it was the burning of the godswood that Jon rejected. If not for that, Jon would probably have accepted Stannis' offer.

[Mikkel]

yes Zman - the right of conquest cannot in and of itself be justification for ruling. Otherwise you would have the faith, the citadel, and numerous lords rebelling, not paying taxes and so forth. For Robert to be recognized as King of the Seven Kingdoms there had to be the targ blood tie in so he would be percieved as a continuation of that dynasty. Which means that Dany, Jon, and Aegon all have valid claims to the throne.

Robert became the leader of the rebellion because he was charismatic, a great general and (ironically) seemed a bright and shining example of what a King should be (at least outwardly). The technicality of his small amount of Targ blood wasn't important until much later, where it was brought up to appease a few die-hard Targ loyalists.

You can be sympathetic to Dany or Aegon's cause if you wish, that's fair enough, but arguing that either of them have any more claim to the throne than what they can get by Right of Conquest is folly IMO. This point is made again and again during the series, and it may actually be (one of) the over-arching themes of the whole story: that might often makes right - not that this notion is particularly nice, but it's depressingly realistic. History is writ by the victor, after all.

[Noneofyourbusiness]

I don't recall this event. Although we heard a bit about the story of the kingmaker, we don't know all the details and defiance of the previous king's wishes, a TARGARYEN King to be sure who WANTED his daughter to serve as queen.

After the Dance of Dragons, it was established that the throne has to go through all living male Targaryens before a female Targaryen can become the heir. Since Dany is the only living Targaryen, she is still the heir by that reckoning. Jon (the user, not the character) was incorrect in stating that it was decided a woman can never be the monarch of the Seven Kingdoms.

[manting]

Mikkel I don't mean you What Im amazed about on this forum is that I have arrived late and many discussions were had well before my time and it appears numerous issues were "decided" and to disagree with them will bring the pointyheaded wrath of the hardcore posters down on your head. I disagreed with some older posters about sansa (who I believe lacks agency and is not very smart or exciting character) and I provided examples. I was summarily told I was wrong and that I should reread the books and my questions went unanswered. You can see it with some of the posters who defend the RoC point of view. It has been decided and to say any different makes you a moron. The RoC theory is flawed.

[manting]

oh and Freerider I agree

[Mikkel]

Mikkel I don't mean you What Im amazed about on this forum is that I have arrived late and many discussions were had well before my time and it appears numerous issues were "decided" and to disagree with them will bring the pointyheaded wrath of the hardcore posters down on your head. I disagreed with some older posters about sansa (who I believe lacks agency and is not very smart or exciting character) and I provided examples. I was summarily told I was wrong and that I should reread the books and my questions went unanswered. You can see it with some of the posters who defend the RoC point of view. It has been decided and to say any different makes you a moron. The RoC theory is flawed.

I know what you mean, but that's what happens when there's 5-6 years between books - everything gets talked about, until everybody who's been around for any length of time has decided what they think is right, at which point it's very, very hard to shift that belief. I'm guilty of that myself - obviously because I think I'm right, but then we all do :)

[Pikachu101]

Manderly doesn't know anything. He heard a story from a kid. It could be that Davos never returns and they just assume the story was fake and Rickons actually dead. Why do you think he sent Davos any ways? If he was a hundred percent sure its more likely he would have sent a small force of men to retrieve him instead he sent Davos a man of questionable loyalty.

You have a good point, but I'm not going to let it go that quickly.

Firstly Manderly probably chose Davis because he's an ex smuggler and it avoids suspicion if any of his own men are caught. Also if you believe Barbrey's in on it, her going to the Winterfell crypts was to insure that the story was true by seeing of anything a missing.

Considering the fact that Jon has just been stabbed in the back, I'm not sure who'll be making an appearance first. Plus there's Lannister free Sansa with the Vale behind her, so the will can still be rebuked by her

Your right on the Arrya and Sansa part but they are both missing or assumed dead so that would only leave Jon Snow.

Well Sansa isn't missing anymore, I have a funny feeling she's going to be making an appearance soon. Especially if LF finds out about Robb's will

[Raksha the Demon]

what makes zero sense is what the Targs themselves decided, a woman will never be able to take the throne. So Dany can never be the queen because guess what, she is a woman

also it was a war and they lost. Lost the throne lost the claim.

If Dany shows up in Westeros with two or three fire-breathing dragons under her control, and some kind of military force backing them, no one is going to care that she's female or where she grew up; they'll be too busy bending the knee so as to avoid incineration, i.e. Field of Fire II. (unless the Maesters have come up with some anti-dragon weaponry)

[direwienerdog]

As long as she is alive Robert knows that there is someone else who might come back and attempt to reclaim the 7K through right of conquest.

A quick cheat sheet on why the Targaryens have no claim to the 7K:

B.S. Dany has the best claim he's called Drogon.

ETA: ninja'd by Jon's Consort <3

[direwienerdog]

You have a good point, but I'm not going to let it go that quickly.

Firstly Manderly probably chose Davis because he's an ex smuggler and it avoids suspicion if any of his own men are caught. Also if you believe Barbrey's in on it, her going to the Winterfell crypts was to insure that the story was true by seeing of anything a missing.

Considering the fact that Jon has just been stabbed in the back, I'm not sure who'll be making an appearance first. Plus there's Lannister free Sansa with the Vale behind her, so the will can still be rebuked by her

Well Sansa isn't missing anymore, I have a funny feeling she's going to be making an appearance soon. Especially if LF finds out about Robb's will

[direwienerdog]

Bent knees or not, they still lost their claim, IMO. Bending the knee is just a show of acceptance. Just because the Targs didn't accept the reality of the situation doesn't mean that it isn't true. In Grease (bear with me here for a second), Craterface lost his car to Danny because they were racing for pinks' (pinkslips, ownership of the car or what have you). Craterface didn't bend the knee to Zucko, but he still lost his car. Roberts Rebellion was a war for theoretical pinkslips (especially when the rebels realized they could win), and the losers lost their property, all 7 Kingdoms of it.

And yes, I was dead serious with the grease reference.

When a family rules for near 300 years and are suddenly deposed by force, I agree they lost by right of conquest. However the conquered is and will be considered a usurper until his family has rule for a least two generations. Everyone in Westeros over the age of 25 knows the Targs are the rulers. They all know of good and bad and mad kings.

The Baratheons are an upstart regime any way you look at it. Most literate people know Robert as usurper who won Robert's Rebelion. He is a Rebel king with only the slightest true claim. His bastard relative,a by blow of the Targ dynasty, give him claim.

Even if you claim Aegon 1 Targ won his claim by right of conquest, he dethroned six kings to get it and was smart enough to make the kings who bent the knee wardens of their own areas.

Stannis claim is weak. He can't claim any truly major houses support. In fact he has lost more support than he started with.

We don't know how the former Blackfyre or Targ loyalists will align this time, but it looks bleak for the Baratheons Family Claim. Regardless of right of conquest or no.

Stannis is in too deep to back out now. Honor or no. Right or wrong he will support only Stannis. Stannis is nothing if not consistent.

[Frozentree]

If he was a hundred percent sure its more likely he would have sent a small force of men to retrieve him instead he sent Davos a man of questionable loyalty.

Davos is of questionable loyalty? You must be kidding. Davos is by far Stannis's most loyal man and his Hand of the King, if Manderly really supports Stannis (which i believe he does, just because he sent Davos), Davos is much less likely to betray than any of his own men

[SkaggCannibal]

The exact wording of the will may not be relevant. If Robb made Jon the heir and legitimized him, it stands. As always, power is about perception. If (and it's still definitely an if) the northern lords are conspiring to restore the Starks, Jon is by far the best option. Arya is still presumed dead. Bran is missing and crippled. Rickon is very young. Sansa is a Lannister. If the north wants a Stark as either liege lord or KitN they will say he's legitimate now. He's the only one that can lead now.

The reasons Jon turned down Winterfell before are his vows and not wanting to steal Sansa's claim. Things were different at the time. Jon didn't know Robb had made him heir. If he knew that Robb wanted him to become the next KitN he might feel differently. Stannis is an outsider and he wanted the weirwood trees burned.

The assassination attempt is another game changer. The phrase "kill the boy and let the man be born" is repeated often. This indicates Jon will be a changed man when he wakes up. The story master Aemon told about being offered the crown even though he was already sworn to the NW means there is precedent. If Jon sees becoming Robb's heir as the best thing for realm, he will take the will and run with it.

Also, who knows what will happen when Jon is unconscious. I think it's very likely Bran will communicate with him in a way that nudges Jon in the direction of accepting his role as a king.

No. Firstly, a will can be overlooked if needed. When it has been written under false pretences it's even easier to overlook. So it doesn't 'stand'. And why would the Northern lords want a strong leader? It would probably be better, but lords prefer a weak lords who they can influence so they have more power. Your argument is because Jon is more capable he will get the kingdom. That could be if he actively pursued it, but he doesn't. The rest of your arguments don't prove anything. the phrase 'kill the boy and let the man be born' is about growing as a Lord Commander. Aemon declining the offer means there is no precedent. If you think the realm will ask him to become king like they did Aemon, you're wrong, there are plenty of candidates for it already. And why would Bran ever encourage Jon to steal his own claim, or that of Rickon, or Sansa, or Arya? The lordship of the North legally belongs to Bran, than to Rickon. They can succesfully rule with help of a Regent. Why would anyone want Jon to steal that away from them?

But you're right about one thing: the exact wording of the will probably isn't relevant. It will be overlooked anyway.

[Frozentree]

The story master Aemon told about being offered the crown even though he was already sworn to the NW means there is precedent.

Where did this rumor come from? Aemon was not sworn to the NW at the time, he was only sworn to the Citadel. When Aemon went to the wall, Egg was already king and sent a "honor guard" with him.

[manting]

Frozentree is right - Aemon was a maester chained and sworn and the high septon offered to absolve him of his vows and he refused. he was then offered a seat on the coucil but he refused that as well since he would usurp the postion of the grandmaester on the council. He was also wary of being used by those who wished to influence the King so he decided to take the black.